AIO Papers 7 the Last Erechtheion Building Accounts
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
_________________________________________________________________________ The Last Erechtheion Building Accounts S. D. Lambert with a contribution by John D. Morgan AIO Papers no. 7 January 2016 Links added: May 2016 AIO Papers Published by Attic Inscriptions Online, 97 Elm Road, Evesham, Worcestershire, WR11 3DR, United Kingdom. Editor: Dr. S. D. Lambert AIO Advisory Board: Professor P. J. Rhodes (Durham) Professor J. Blok (Utrecht) Dr. A. P. Matthaiou (Athens) Mr. S. G. Byrne (Melbourne) Dr. P. Liddel (Manchester) © Attic Inscriptions Online 2016 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Attic Inscriptions Online, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographic rights organisation. Enquiries concerning reproduction should be sent to Dr. S. D. Lambert at the above address or via the contact given at www.atticinscriptions.com. ISSN 2054-6769 (Print) ISSN 2054-6777 (Online) THE LAST ERECHTHEION BUILDING ACCOUNTS1 S. D. Lambert with a contribution by John D. Morgan The main body of the building accounts of the Erechtheion are in Attic script: IG I3 474-475, of 409/8 BC, and IG I3 476, of 408/7 (and possibly 407/62). There are also two sets of accounts in Ionic script:3 1. The most substantial comprises the two joining fragments, Caskey XXVII (= fr. a below) – XXVIII (= fr. b below) (pp. 418-420, a better text than IG II2 1654). Lambert 2000 (SEG 50.69) showed that these fragments belong with IG I3 478 (= fr. c below), as E. Schweigert had argued (Hesp. 7, 1938, 268-269), and that, correctly read, several of the workers named on the fragments can be identified with workers named on the accounts in Attic script. This undermines the idea, espoused in IG I3, that these accounts date to some time in the early fourth century, and suggests rather that they belong in a group with the other surviving accounts. In XXVIII (fr. b), l. 28, there is reference to work on parts of the temple damaged by fire. This is most naturally taken as repair work following the acropolis fire of 406 BC (Xen. Hell. 1.6.1). Since, as we shall see, no. 2 below (IG I3 477) dates most comfortably to the third and fourth prytanies of 405/4, 406/5 is a good candidate for the year of fr. b, with fr. a belonging either to the same year or to 407/6. In 2000 I did not supply a continuous text and my revisions, and 1 I am very grateful to John Morgan for his advice on the date of IG I3 477 and for his permission to include in this paper his discussion of its broader calendrical implications. Caskey: L. D. Caskey, “The Inscriptions”, ch. 4 of J. M. Paton ed., The Erechtheum (Cambridge, Mass., 1927); Dinsmoor 1932: W. B. Dinsmoor, “The Burning of the Opisthodomos at Athens”, AJA 36, 143-172 (cf. SEG 10.299); Lambert 2000: S. D. Lambert, “The Erechtheum Workers of IG II2 1654”, ZPE 132, 157-160 (SEG 50.69). 2 Cf. Lambert 2000, 160 n. 16. 3 I exclude IG I3 479 (= SEG 10.301), which is too fragmentary for confident identification as an Erechtheion account. 1 the subsequent discussion of the name in l. 2, have yet to be incorporated in the PHI database. For the ease of reference of users of AIO I supply a fresh text below. It is not based on any new primary work, but merely represents the textual status quo following my 2000 article and reactions to it. col. 1 col. 2 8 ․ ․ . ․ ․ ․ ․ ․ Ε̣ – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – stoich. fr. a [.]Α̣ ΔΜΟΝΑΝΑ[– – – – – – – – – ἐμ Με]– [λ]ίτ(ηι) οἰκο͂ν(τα) Δ– – – – – – – – – – – – [.]σι οἰκο͂ν(τα) Δ– – – – – – – – – – – – – 5 [.]Δ· Ἀρίστωνα Ἀλω[πε(κῆσι) οἰκ( ντα) –] [.] ἐμ Μελί(τηι) οἰκ( ντα) Ńł – – – – – – – – [Μ]υννίωνα ἐμ Μελ̣[ί(τηι) οἰκ( ντα) – – – –] [Σ]ῶ̣κλον Ἀλωπε(κῆσι) ο[ἰκ( ντα) – – –] [.] ἐτιμήθη ΔΔŃ[– – – – – – – – – – – τ]– 10 [ῆ]ι βολῆι ἐς [– – – – – – – – – – τῶι δή]– [μ]ωι δoξαν – – – – – – – – – – – – – – [Ἀ]γγελῆθ[εν – – – – – – – – – – – – – [.]ΔŃł· Φ⟨υ⟩[ρόμαχ- Kηφισι- – – – – –] [.]ιτον. [– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –] 15 [.]γραφο[– – – – – – – – – – – ἐν Κολ?]– λυ(τῶι?) οἰκῶ[ν – – – – – – – – – – – –] ἐς τὸ β[– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Β]– ατῆθ̣[εν – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – [.]της – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 20 [.]ον – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 2 [.]πρ – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – [․]Ι – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 25 . ․11․ ․ ․ ․ ․ Ι – – – – – – – – – – fr. b [. .]I[. .6. .]ΑΡΧΟΝ[– – – – – – – –] [τρ]ί[τηι τ]ῆς πρυτα[νέας – – – – – –] [․ τ]ο͂ τ̣ε ν̣εὼ τὰ κεκα[υμένα – – – –] [ψη]φισαμένης τῆς β[ολῆς – – – – – –] 30 [․ ․ ․] ἐγ Κολλ(υτῶι) οἰκῶ(ν) ΔΔ[– – – τῆς πρυ]– [τα]νέας τo ἐργαστη[ριο– – – – – – – – –] [Δ]ρωπίδης ἐν Μελί(τηι) οἰκ̣[ῶν – – – – – τ]– ῆς πρυτανέας μισθώμ[ατα – – – – – Θ]– ρασωνίδηι Κικυννεῖ – – – – – – – – – 35 [.]να̣ίος τὸς ἐπὶ τῶν τοί[χων – – – – –] [.]ς κατὰ τὸ Πανδρόσειο[ν – – – – δρ]– [α]χμῶν ἕκαστον μισθω[.]Ο/[ – – – – –] [․]ńΔłłłΙΙΙΙΙ· ἑβδόμηι τῆ[ς πρυτανέας – – τὸς ὀ] [χετ?]ὸς τὸς καινὸς ἐξεργ[ά]ζ[ομένωι – –] 40 [δραχμ]ῶν τὴν εἰκοσίπο[δ]ί[αν – – – – – –] ․ ․ . 6․ ․ ․ Δ̣ŃΙΙΙ ἐς τὴν ἄλει[ψιν – – – – –] [․ ․ .5․ ․ π]α̣ρὰ Σατύρας ἐ Σκ̣[αμβω(νίδαις) οἰκ(όσης) – –] [․ ․ ․ ․7․ ․ . χά?]λ̣ιξ ̣ ἐς τὸς ὀχε[τός – – – –] ․ ․ ․ ․ .10․ ․ ․ ․ . ł παλιμ– – – – – – – – – 45 ․ ․ ․ ․ . ․12․ ․ ․ ․ . ․ ΣΤΩ̣ – – – – – – – – – 3 lacuna – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – ΙΙΙ, Πρέ̣ποντ– fr. c 50 οἰ[κ ντι – – – – – – – – – – – – – – ο]- [ι – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –]ΙΙΙ, Σισύφωι ἰκ [ντι – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –] [– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –] τῆς πρυτανε– Παρμ[ένοντι Λαόσσο – – – – – – – –] [ίας – – – – – – – – – – – – – ]στωι ΔΔ Ἱ̣ερ– κι– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – The position of fr. c in relation to fragments a and b is uncertain. The readings of a + b are those recorded by Caskey, revised by Lambert 2000, the readings of fr. c are those of Schweigert, confirmed, or in the case of l. 49, revised by Lambert 2000. Supplements are by Koehler, 5, 38-39, 39 fin., 40, 42 Caskey, 8, 13, 17-18, 43 Lambert, 15-16, 32 in. Wilamowitz, 41 Preuner, fr. c Schweigert. 1-2 [Εὔ|κ]α̣δμον Ἀνα[καιέα], paternal grandfather of the Eukadmos of Anakaia who was anagrapheus under the oligarchy in 319/8 BC (Agora XVI 101) and the sculptor whose student Androsthenes carved the figures in the temple of Apollo at Delphi (Paus. 10.19.4), probably in 327 BC (J. Bousquet, BCH 108 [1984], 695-698), J. D. Morgan, AJA 106 (2002), 296 (SEG 50.69). [Φ|ρά]δμονα previous eds. A. Corso, NAC 30 (2001), 53-71 (SEG 51.2355) suggests that he is the Phradmon of Argos, sculptor in bronze ca. 420 BC (Pliny, NH 34.49 and 53; Paus. 6.8.1), but one would expect an Argive to be identified in this inscription as a metic, by Attic deme of residence, and Να- are not the initial letters of any Attic deme. Also possible: Phradmon (slave) of Na-. 5 Perhaps identifiable with Ἀριστ-, named in the company of sculptors/stone-workers at IG I3 476, 402. 7 Identifiable with the sculptor, Mynnion of Agryle, IG I3 476, 169-70, listed there, as here, immediately before Soklos, supposing that, in the meantime, he had changed deme of residence. 8 Identifiable with the sculptor Soklos resident in Alopeke, IG I3 476, 173. 11-12 Lambert 2000, 158 tentatively suggested that this may have been a reference to Καλλίας Ἀγγελῆθεν, eponymous archon in 406/5. 13 ΦΨ- stone. Identifiable as Phyromachos of Kephisia, sculptor at IG I3 476, 144, 159, 175, 419. 14 Lambert 2000 suggested [Θευγ|ε]ίτονο̣[ς or [Θευγ|ε]ίτονι, ̣ ? = the stone worker Theugeiton of Piraeus at IG I3 476, 99, 217, 325. 15-16 Φ]|λυ οἰ 4 17 β[ολευτήριον dub. Koe. 26 [ἐπ|ὶ Δ]ι[οφάντο] ἄρχοντος (395/4) Koe., [ἐπ]ὶ [Καλλίο] ἄρχον[τος (406/5) or [ἐπ]ὶ [Ἀλεξίο] ἄρχον[τος (405/4) or -θε]ν̣ [καὶ συν]αρχόν[των] Caskey and Dinsmoor pp. 152-60. 30-33 Structural work on a workshop is recorded at IG I3 475, 263, but Caskey/Dinsmoor’s τὸ ἐργαστή[ριον οἰκοδομήσαντι] is uncertain, as are their restorations of the days in prytany as τετάρτηι (30), πέμπτηι (32). 39 fin. τριῶν Dinsmoor. 43 For χάλιξ cf. Thuc. 1.93.5, IG I3 387, 44. On the ὀχετοί in the Erechtheum, Caskey p. 356 (inconclusive). 46-47 Identifiable as the metic Prepon resident in Agryle, listed as a stone-cutter at IG I3 476, 14, 24 etc. 47 Identifiable as the metic goldsmith Sisyphos resident in Melite, IG I3 476, 57-58. 52 Identifiable as the Parmenon slave of Laossos, IG I3 476, 77, 225, 308. 2. IG I3 477 (= IG II2 1655 = Caskey XXIX). – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – εσ. εσ łΙΙΙ v χάρτης [εἰς ἐγγραφὴν ἀντιγράφ]- stoich. 35 ων łłłΙΙΙ vvv λήμματο[ς καὶ σύμπαντος ἀναλώ]- ματος κεφάλαιον ŅΗΗΗ – – – – – – – – – – ἐπὶ τῆς Πανδιονίδος τετ[άρτης πρυτανευόσ]- 5 ης λῆμμα παρὰ ταμιῶν τῆς [θεο͂ ․ . ․ ․ . ․11․ ․ ․ ․ ․ Π]- ροβαλισίο καὶ συναρχόν[των ἕκτηι(?) καὶ δεκά]- τηι τῆς πρυτανείας∶ Χ v [v εἰς θυσίαν τοῖς Χα]- λ̣κείοις τῆι Ἀθηναίαι [․ ․ ․ ․ ․ ․ . ․17․ ․ ․ ․ ․ ․ ․ ․] [. ․ ․ ․8․ ․ ․ ․]ΛΤΛΛ․ ․Σ – – – – – – – – – – – – 5 Readings and restorations, which mostly follow the first edition of Lolling, Δελτ. Ἀρχ. 1888, 118 no. 2, are as recorded in IG I3, except ll. 7- 8. 1 ς Bannier ap. IG II2 1655, cf. IG I3 476, 188-190. 6 Dinsmoor 1932. 7-8 R. Parker, Polytheism and Society at Athens (2005), 464; Ἀν]|ακείοις eds. If Parker’s attractive suggestion is correct, it enables some progress to be made on the determination of the year (407-405 in IG I3), as the